Question:
The clock is also a classic image used for explosion bunker shots. Align the body with 11 o’clock and the clubface at 1 o’clock. Swing along your body and the ball will float out to noon. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Your instructor is using terminology that even **I** have never heard before. I haven’t the foggiest notion as to what he’s talking about. Like I said in the beginning of my original response, the problem, IMHO, with much of the instruction out there is that it uses confusing language. Not that it’s necessarily flawed in its depiction of the action itself, but that it’s expressed in such a way as not to communicate the intent with clarity. Rather than having me try to "interpret" the meaning your instructor intended to convey with this rather convaluted syntax, I’d suggest instead you ask him directly to SHOW YOU (not TELL you) what he means. You shouldn’t need to pay for an entire lesson just to get him to explain his language, just drop by and ask him to demonstrate what he means with these "clock" references. I’d only be guessing, and in so doing, possibly only adding more confusion. I’ve seen something like this in magazines here, normally as an exercise to correct an out to in path. You imagine that you are at the centre of a clockface, with the target at 12 o’clock. Having the hands going towards 1 o’clock at impact would therefore equal a slight in-out path, and thinking of this picture is said to be useful in correcting an out- in path.
Response:
Eddie Haynes-Smart wrote … [much snipped] Incidentally Randy, do I detect an element of *tetchiness* in some of your posts, which I do not remember from earlier sojourn on this forum? Sciatica playing up? A stubborn handicap? Putting becoming a trial?
Must be "cabin fever." No golf for several weeks makes me grouchy. You’re right — I should direct my aggression at the weatherman. 
Randy
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Your instructor is using terminology that even **I** have never heard before. I haven’t the foggiest notion as to what he’s talking about. Like I said in the beginning of my original response, the problem, IMHO, with much of the instruction out there is that it uses confusing language. Not that it’s necessarily flawed in its depiction of the action itself, but that it’s expressed in such a way as not to communicate the intent with clarity. Rather than having me try to "interpret" the meaning your instructor intended to convey with this rather convaluted syntax, I’d suggest instead you ask him directly to SHOW YOU (not TELL you) what he means. You shouldn’t need to pay for an entire lesson just to get him to explain his language, just drop by and ask him to demonstrate what he means with these "clock" references. I’d only be guessing, and in so doing, possibly only adding more confusion.
I’ve seen something like this in magazines here, normally as an exercise to correct an out to in path. You imagine that you are at the centre of a clockface, with the target at 12 o’clock. Having the hands going towards 1 o’clock at impact would therefore equal a slight in-out path, and thinking of this picture is said to be useful in correcting an out- in path. Cheers, — Steve Walker Golfing since 12 May 98 ‘He comes to realise that the game is not against the foe, but against himself. His little self. That yammering fearful ever-resistant self that freezes, chokes, tops, nobbles, shanks, skulls, duffs, flubbs. This is the self we must defeat.’
Response:
Hi Randy & Yimin If I can *chip* in …
snip just drop by and ask him to demonstrate what he means with these "clock"
references. This reference system is used fairly frequently here in South Africa. As I understand it if you are standing behind the ball the target would then be at 12 o’clock. Thus if you have a tendency to swing that right shoulder out or to cut across the line from out-to-in the pro will tell you to swing your hands out towards the "1 o’clock" position, ie, this to try and promote extending the hands through the ball etc etc, resulting in an in-to-out swing and taking that right shoulder down with the left shoulder coming up as opposed to turning to the left too soon. Incidentally Randy, do I detect an element of *tetchiness* in some of your posts, which I do not remember from earlier sojourn on this forum? Sciatica playing up? A stubborn handicap? Putting becoming a trial? Always remember I am available for consultations at a moment’s notice! — Eddie "trust me I’m an expert" Haynes-Smart Cape Town, South Africa
Response:
Your instructor is using terminology that even **I** have never heard before. I haven’t the foggiest notion as to what he’s talking about. Like I said in the beginning of my original response, the problem, IMHO, with much of the instruction out there is that it uses confusing language. Not that it’s necessarily flawed in its depiction of the action itself, but that it’s expressed in such a way as not to communicate the intent with clarity. Rather than having me try to "interpret" the meaning your instructor intended to convey with this rather convaluted syntax, I’d suggest instead you ask him directly to SHOW YOU (not TELL you) what he means. You shouldn’t need to pay for an entire lesson just to get him to explain his language, just drop by and ask him to demonstrate what he means with these "clock" references. I’d only be guessing, and in so doing, possibly only adding more confusion. Randy – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – writes: Now, understand "square": If your spine were bent at a 90-degree angle to your body (putting your spine perfectly HORIZONTAL and PARALLEL TO THE GROUND), you could swing perfectly "square-to-square." Of course, our bodies aren’t built that way, and the only way we humans can swing a golf club is to tilt our spines at an angle. That means that "square-to-square" simply means "maintaining plane" thoughout the swing, the plane being perpendicular to our spine. This is, by definition, "square to square." However, because we are standing over the ball with our spine angle tilted, it creates the optical illusion of the club coming inside the line as we rotate away from the ball around a fixed center. We’re square at impact (though the body is actually a little ahead at that point). And as the club comes through impact, it "appears" to come back inside. But remember, true "square" means keeping it on plane. But it LOOKS LIKE "inside-to-square-to-inside." Randy Randy: Thank you for such a detail description. But I still have a question. I remember that my instructor wanted me to swing to the "1 o’clock" direction for quarter swings and half swings. By "1 o’clock", one uses the club head to target direction as the "12 o’clock" direction. During quater and half swing, I was told to do only weight shifting and minimum hip rotation. At finish positions, my hands are pointing to the 1 o’clock direction. And the ball does go straight when my swing are excuted correctly(? :- ). For full swing, because of the hip rotation, the hands will finish high and rest somewhere near up above my left ear. From your description, the down swings are symmetrical with respect to the spine. Therefore the hands should finish 11 o’clock direction for half and quater swings. Am I missing something here? Or my instructor was teaching something different? Yimin
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Now, understand "square": If your spine were bent at a 90-degree angle to your body (putting your spine perfectly HORIZONTAL and PARALLEL TO THE GROUND), you could swing perfectly "square-to-square." Of course, our bodies aren’t built that way, and the only way we humans can swing a golf club is to tilt our spines at an angle. That means that "square-to-square" simply means "maintaining plane" thoughout the swing, the plane being perpendicular to our spine. This is, by definition, "square to square." However, because we are standing over the ball with our spine angle tilted, it creates the optical illusion of the club coming inside the line as we rotate away from the ball around a fixed center. We’re square at impact (though the body is actually a little ahead at that point). And as the club comes through impact, it "appears" to come back inside. But remember, true "square" means keeping it on plane. But it LOOKS LIKE "inside-to-square-to-inside." Randy
Randy: Thank you for such a detail description. But I still have a question. I remember that my instructor wanted me to swing to the "1 o’clock" direction for quarter swings and half swings. By "1 o’clock", one uses the club head to target direction as the "12 o’clock" direction. During quater and half swing, I was told to do only weight shifting and minimum hip rotation. At finish positions, my hands are pointing to the 1 o’clock direction. And the ball does go straight when my swing are excuted correctly(? :- ). For full swing, because of the hip rotation, the hands will finish high and rest somewhere near up above my left ear. From your description, the down swings are symmetrical with respect to the spine. Therefore the hands should finish 11 o’clock direction for half and quater swings. Am I missing something here? Or my instructor was teaching something different? Yimin
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Hi, Here I have a beginners question on the swing path. I took some lesson before and was taught to take a inside-to-outside swing path for all shots (including putting) except for bunker shots. Recent I found in Harvey Penick’s Redbook that he claimed to perfer the inside-sqaure-inside swings. Being a beginner and not knowing much about the mechanism of golf swing (Well, my instruction did not explain why to me), could someone shed some light on this issue? Or simply I misunderstood Harvey’s statement. Thank you very much in advance. Yimin
Hi, Yimin… It strikes me that all this language about "in-to-out" and "in-to-square-to in" is all pretty confusing. It’s easy to see why so many beginners faulter, and eventually resign themselves to a lifetime of mediocre-to-bad golf. Alot of the problem, IMHO, is that the teachings about the golf swing are either confusing, conflicting, or both. Sorting it all out can prove to be a frustrating (and lifelong) pursuit, and sadly, too often without much of a payoff. You’re on the right track by acknowledging your ignorance of "the mechanism" of the golf swing. And I would direct you further to understand the *physics* of the golf swing. Observe the world’s best players. Notice how "centered" they remain throughout their swings. Notice their head against the background and pay particular attention of how still it is, and how their shoulders rotate around it. This is a real good starting point. Jack Nicklaus once said that his longtime teacher, the late Jack Grout, used to grab on to his blonde locks as young Nicklaus would swing the golf club. Whenever he moved his head, he felt the tug on his hair. It taught him to keep his head steady. This is accomplished by maintaining a consistent spine angle (tilted slightly forward) throughout the swing, and rotating around an essentially fixed axis. Once you grasp this fundamental truth about "center," other dynamics of the golf swing begin to fall into place. Like your question about swing path… The next fundamental you must understand (which curiously, is seldom discussed in most instructional propaganda) is that the hands and arms do NOT independently swing the club. It’s the SHOULDERS that rotate back to initiate the swing. The arms simply ride along — all the while maintaining their relation to the front of the body. The right elbow folds to accept the extended left arm at the top of the swing, then the lower body initiates the move from the top. All the while, the arms continue to maintain their relation to the front of the body set at address. Through impact, the swing becomes essentially a mirror of the backswing. The right arm extends past impact, and the left elbow folds late in the follow through as the hands come up to a finishing position near the left ear. That’s a long, long way around… but it gets back to your original question. By allowing the arms to maintain their relative position to the front of the body, thereby maintaining "connection" with the upper body (particularly in the armpit areas); and by allowing the upper body to rotate around a fixed axis, you allow the club to swing "on plane" throughout the swing, which keeps it "square" to the line throughout the swing. Now, understand "square": If your spine were bent at a 90-degree angle to your body (putting your spine perfectly HORIZONTAL and PARALLEL TO THE GROUND), you could swing perfectly "square-to-square." Of course, our bodies aren’t built that way, and the only way we humans can swing a golf club is to tilt our spines at an angle. That means that "square-to-square" simply means "maintaining plane" thoughout the swing, the plane being perpendicular to our spine. This is, by definition, "square to square." However, because we are standing over the ball with our spine angle tilted, it creates the optical illusion of the club coming inside the line as we rotate away from the ball around a fixed center. We’re square at impact (though the body is actually a little ahead at that point). And as the club comes through impact, it "appears" to come back inside. But remember, true "square" means keeping it on plane. But it LOOKS LIKE "inside-to-square-to-inside." Randy
Response:
This question probably will touch off a pretty hearty discussion with varying opinions, but I think one truism is that swingpath doesn’t exist on its own — it ties directly to other motions of the downswing and hands and how you are trying to shape a shot. Another factor is your instructor may have been emphasizing the inside-out swing to address a particular fault he or she saw at the time. As to the specific question, inside to square to inside is not so much different than inside-out. Inside-out eventually has to lead to square to inside on the follow-through. You may be talking more an issue of degree than one of substance. Again another issue of degree too is I believe how much you drive with your hips — not just turn but shift them toward the target. On your backswing, your club should follow path that is along a particular plane (ie it’s on plane not shooting above or below it). When you shift your hips at the start of the downswing, you shift that plane, basically tilting it. The more you shift, the more the plane tilts to the outside. The other issue is the type of shot you are promoting, a inside out swing promotes a draw. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Here I have a beginners question on the swing path. I took some lesson before and was taught to take a inside-to-outside swing path for all shots (including putting) except for bunker shots. Recent I found in Harvey Penick’s Redbook that he claimed to perfer the inside-sqaure-inside swings. Being a beginner and not knowing much about the mechanism of golf swing (Well, my instruction did not explain why to me), could someone shed some light on this issue? Or simply I misunderstood Harvey’s statement.
Response:
Hi, Here I have a beginners question on the swing path. I took some lesson before and was taught to take a inside-to-outside swing path for all shots (including putting) except for bunker shots. Recent I found in Harvey Penick’s Redbook that he claimed to perfer the inside-sqaure-inside swings. Being a beginner and not knowing much about the mechanism of golf swing (Well, my instruction did not explain why to me), could someone shed some light on this issue? Or simply I misunderstood Harvey’s statement. Thank you very much in advance. Yimin